fb-google

Our Blog

Lawsuit Restrictions Concerning Drug Manufacturers Clears State House Of Representatives

Lawsuit Restrictions Concerning Drug Manufacturers Clears State House Of Representatives

If you look back to Wednesday’s posts you will find an entry discussing a recent lawsuit filed by the South Carolina Attorney General against a major drug manufacturer because of the risk of serious injuries and death by way of heart attacks that a diabetes drug poses to South Carolinians. Today, your Charleston workers’ compensation lawyers read that there is a bill making its way through the North Carolina state legislature that aims at making it harder to sue drug producers, among other provisions.

The Tort Reform for Citizens and Businesses Bill is a Republican led initiative to restrict product liability lawsuits against drug makers. The bill is a vital piece of legislation on the Republication agenda this session and follows a medical malpractice bill that has made its way to a conference committee of State Representative and Senate members. Ultimately, the bills want to reduce insurance and health care costs, while improving North Carolina’s business environment.

Although Republicans are pushing the Tort Reform Bill, some of the state’s 52 House Democrats are in support of the bill, helping it clear the House yesterday. Now, it moves on to the State Senate.

The Bill is not without controversy, its author has agreed to scale back the proposed provision that protects drug manufacturers from product liability lawsuits if the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had approved the drug they produced, except in the event of fraud or bribery. That provision has been modified to allow plaintiffs to sue if the drug was unsafe or ineffective in treatment. But, it is the burden of the plaintiff to prove that the drug was unsafe or ineffective by clear and convincing evidence, which is a standard of proof whose requirements fall between those in criminal proceedings and in most civil cases, beyond a reasonable doubt and preponderance of evidence, respectively.

Earlier this year the State’s Attorney General told the House committee studying the Bill that exempting drug manufacturers from product liability lawsuits would seriously impede the efforts of his office’s Medicaid fraud and consumer protection divisions from pursuing cases against major drug makers. In the past decade North Carolina has collected over $400 million in Medicaid settlements.

To the Attorney General, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for the legislature to want to protect the drug manufacturers and restrict the State’s ability to attack companies that hurt patients with unsafe products and/or deceive the government. He also notes, other states don’t have these obstacles in place when it comes to filing suit against manufacturers of defective products.

The contents of this Web site are for informational purposes regarding legal issues in South Carolina and are not intended to convey detailed legal advice on specific issues. Transmission of the information contained in this site or any sites linked hereto is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions we are properly authorized to do so and do not seek to represent anyone in any jurisdiction where this site does not comply with applicable laws and bar rules. The lawyers of the law firm of Christmas Injury Lawyers are licensed to practice law in the State of South Carolina. Readers should not act upon the information contained in this site without first seeking the advice of an attorney licensed to practice in your area.

Attorneys principally practice in Mt. Pleasant office, but we will meet you at the time and office most convenient to you. We will also come to your hospital room or home upon request.

The information given above are examples of actual cases with actual clients our law firm has handled in the past. The reviews listed on our website are endorsements and/or testimonials from actual clients. Any results our law firm may achieve on behalf of one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients.